Comments for Televising The Revolution

Comment on Video Archiving by Isaac Bennetch

Isaac Bennetch — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:39:40 +0000

I meant to mention this in my previous message but forgot; on this blog you have an excellent guide to handling DVDs to help preserve the content:
http://televisingtherevolution.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/10-simple-suggestions-for-handling-cds-and-dvds/

Comment on Video Archiving by Isaac Bennetch

Isaac Bennetch — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:35:44 +0000

This is good information.

These days with so much information being stored on digital medium (ie hard drives), it’s important to also have a good backup plan. Additionally, DVD shelf life is “iffy” and the media is cheap, so it’s probably a good idea to make multiple copies of your DVDs every few years.

Dubbing older materials to a digital medium is certainly an excellent idea, but some of your readers may not realize that even digital materials (such as DVDs) may degrade over time.

Comment on The File Frenzy by Silent 3

Silent 3 — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:32:57 +0000

Amen, brother. The information stays the same, but the media change.

My favorite bit in the movie Men in Black: Agent Kay holds up a tiny disk and says, “Fascinating little gadget. Gonna replace CDs soon. Guess I’m gonna have to buy the White Album again.”

Comment on 10 Simple Suggestions For Handling CDs and DVDs by televisingtherevolution

televisingtherevolution — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 17:42:31 +0000

Thank you for your comment Martin C.

The rights and wrongs of marking optical media can be very confusing. I claim no expertise on the subject but rely on researching several trusted sources such as the NIST and others.

Typing the search term CD Marking Pens into several randomly selected, major search engines yielded many hits for “Write Safe” type of markers. As one visits the links they find that many manufacturers claim their product to be solvent free and safe to use. That is their opinion, not the opinion of this writer.

My personal method is to mark an identifying number on the clear hub or more detailed information on the case or sleeve. I never write on the surface of the disc itself nor would I apply a label. That way the data area is not subject to any pressure or stress. -33-

Comment on 10 Simple Suggestions For Handling CDs and DVDs by Martin C.

Martin C. — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 16:40:09 +0000

So this brings up the question, who actually manufactures a “non-solvent-based felt-tip permanent marker”? I know of none that do. As far as I know, most of the major markers are solvent based.

At the Sharpie website FAQ’s about using their markers on CDs (http://www.sharpie.com/enUS/FAQ/default.html), they state: “Sanford has used Sharpie markers on CDs for years and we have never experienced a problem. We do not believe that the Sharpie ink can affect these CDs, however we have not performed any long-term laboratory testing to verify this. We have spoken to many major CD manufacturers about this issue. They use the Sharpie markers on CDs internally as well, and do not believe that the Sharpie ink will cause any harm to their products. ” So it would seem that all they are saying is that their markers haven’t caused any troubles that we know of but we really haven’t done any long term testing so don’t hold us accountable.

…and Radium was once a good idea for glow in the dark clock & watch faces…

Comment on A Requiem For Analog TV by Martin C.

Martin C. — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:07:50 +0000

This isn’t the first time the FCC has threatened to make existing TV sets obsolete (or at least incompatible). This happened before with the development of color television when the CBS color system (aka field sequential color system) was slated to become the national standard. There were 2 major hindrances to the acceptance of the CBS system (which many say was a far superior system). Firstly, the system required synchronized rotating color wheels be used in front of the TV camera as well as the TV receiver’s screen. I’m sure that if this system had been put into use nationally, an all electronic version would have come about in short order. The other and possibly bigger hindrance to the acceptance of the CBS color system was the fact that the system wasn’t compatible with the existing NTSC system. The CBS system would necessitate that a fairly inexpensive converter be used in order to see television images on “old” B&W TVs. This incompatibility was touted aggressively by David Sarnoff/RCA/NBC as they tried every way they could think of to stall the coming of color TV (even taking things to the Supreme Court). The FCC had initially decided that the field sequential color system (aka CBS color system) would be the accepted standard for the US in 1950, but with the stalling tactics of Sarnoff et al, they were ultimately able to have their inferior, though compatible, dot sequential color system (still the current standard) made the standard by 1953. This was due in large part to the fact that by this time there were so many B&W sets in use that the FCC was reluctant to make all of these sets obsolete.

Now existing analog TV’s are being made obsolete with the coming of digital TV and no one’s squawked. Hmmm…….

BTW, the decision to use the RCA color system I feel also helped to significantly hinder the spread of color TV. After the initial excitement of color broadcasts in late 1953 and sales of color TV sets beginning in 1954, the spread of color stalled and actually declined somewhat even with yearly predictions by David Sarnoff of the bright future of color TV. In reality, the RCA color system was inferior and sets were very costly (“mechanical” color sets using the CBS system would have cost less). It wasn’t until the late 60’s that network television had completely converted to color.